
Hope you had a good day, folks.
If all printers were determined not to print anything till they were sure it would offend nobody, there would be very little printed. -- Benjamin Franklin

The principal piece of "legislation that has already been prepared," and that Romney would rubber-stamp, is, according to Norquist, the Paul Ryan budget.
I find that entirely plausible. It exactly matches the M.O. of all the GOP governors who got elected in 2010: Get in and start enacting the agenda before the voters know what hit them. (And, yes, I know that doing this got most of the Teabag Year Zero governors into trouble with the voters, but I'm not sure their demise is guaranteed, and I'm not sure they care in any case. I'm sure the Kochs and their allies will take care of all of them if they get big chunks of the wingnut agenda enacted and then lose office via electoral defeat or recall.)
“(The president) is wrong to suggest the ending of Saturday mail delivery service,” Independent Senator Bernie Sanders told Reuters. “In the long run, if the Postal Service is to grow and become financially stronger, speed and maintaining the current mail delivery standards are terribly important.”
Rural lawmakers have criticized bills in the House of Representatives and Senate for allowing the Postal Service to close some post offices and processing facilities. The White House plan is silent on the issue.
The agency is considering closing thousands of facilities this year. Postal officials agreed to a moratorium on closings until mid-May but are continuing to look at which facilities should close.
More than 100 lawmakers in the House sent a letter to Postmaster General Patrick Donahoe on Monday calling for the agency to consider obtaining more data before closing post offices. They cited a recent report from the Postal Regulatory Commission that said the service could have done more analysis to determine which post offices to close.
“The closure of post offices, stations and branches will undoubtedly affect communities and lead to the loss of middle class jobs,” the letter states.
DALLAS (AP) – Diane Aulger was about two weeks from her delivery date when she and her husband decided there was no time to wait: Mark Aulger had only days to live, and he wanted to see his child.
Diane Aulger had her labor induced and gave birth to their daughter Jan. 18. When tiny Savannah was placed in his arms, Mark Aulger "cried, and he just looked very sad," his wife said. He died five days later from complications related to his cancer treatment.
Apple and Sony Music are being criticized after the price of one Whitney Houston album more than doubled following the singer’s tragic death.
Digital Spy first reported that the price of Houston’s 2007 Ultimate Collection skyrocketed from £3 ($4.70) to £7.99 ($12.60) within 30 minutes of her death on Saturday.
“To say I am angry is an understatement and I feel it is just a case of iTunes cashing in on the singer’s death, which in my opinion is totally parasitic,” one fan, who spent two hours trying to buy the album at the old price, told Digital Spy.
“The album itself is great so please don’t be put off purchasing it, just [realize] that you will merely be lining some fatcat’s pocket before Whitney’s lifeless body is cold.”
Regardless of price, Houston’s albums are expected to stay at the top of the charts for the next few weeks.
By Monday, seven of her albums were on Amazon’s top ten list. Her 1992 remake of Dolly Parton’s “I Will Always Love You” was the number one single on iTunes. “I Wanna Dance With Somebody” also made it on to the the top ten list.
Houston died Saturday, aged 48, in a Beverly Hills hotel on the eve of the Grammys, triggering shock and a wave of tributes as music stars gathered for the annual awards show.
The proposal, in the president’s fiscal 2013 budget released today, would reverse his previous policy that called for taxing dividends more lightly than wage income. The plan would treat dividends as ordinary income for married couples making more than $250,000 a year and individuals making more than $200,000. The dividend tax proposal would raise $206.4 billion over 10 years.
“We simply can’t afford to devote $206 billion for lower tax rates for the highest-income Americans,” Gene Sperling, White House director of the National Economic Council, told reporters today. “Our system for taxing investment income for the most well-off Americans is clearly broken.”
Obama is proposing a top individual income tax rate of 39.6 percent in 2013, up from 35 percent. His budget would tax capital gains at a top rate of 20 percent, up from 15 percent. The top dividend tax rate is now 15 percent.
An additional 3.8 percent tax on the unearned income of couples earning $250,000 and individuals making at least $200,000 will take effect in 2013 as part of the 2010 health- care law. As a result, some taxpayers would pay 43.4 percent in federal taxes on their dividends next year, almost triple what they now pay.
Sure, Republicans talk tough about balanced budgets. But when it comes to real budget deficits — you know, federal spending vs. federal revenues — Republicans lose interest real fast. Under closer scrutiny, their plans dissolve into gimmicks and magic asterisks. When Obama and Speaker John Boehner started serious negotiations into larger deficit reductions last year, the House GOP conference revolted. Their big structural reforms, from “CutGo” to the line item veto to their “balanced” budget amendment, virtually always turn out to be perhaps effective tools for keeping taxes low for rich folks, but do nothing at all for getting spending and revenues to match. And now, the same thing has happened on the payroll tax cut. Republicans simply don’t rank fiscal balance very high in their list of priorities. They’re always willing to cut spending on those things they don’t want to spend money on anyway, but if it comes to compromising, what gives way is their supposed commitment to budget discipline.
President Barack Obama would almost double spending on the U.S. infrastructure over the next six years and would pour $350 billion into a jobs plan while shrinking the budgets of most other domestic agencies.
The blueprint for the fiscal 2013 budget released today would spend $476 billion through 2018 on highway, bridge and mass transit projects, funded in part by winding down the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It cuts some energy programs, farm subsidies and federal workers’ retirement plans, while bulking up the Securities and Exchange Commission and creating a new panel to investigate unfair foreign trade practices.
Investing in the nation’s transportation grid is a fresh attempt to create jobs for a president facing re-election this year amid voter concern about the economy and unemployment at 8.3 percent in January. In addition to gasoline tax revenue, transportation spending would come from a $38.5 billion-a-year transfer from the fund that now goes to war spending.
“Most Americans understand that a crumbling infrastructure is not the way to build an economy that can last,” White House Chief of Staff Jack Lew said on CNN’s “State of the Union” program. “We need to make sure we have a manufacturing base in this country” and workers with appropriate skills, said Lew, the former White House budget director.
Obama’s proposals for discretionary spending must adhere to August’s Budget Control Act, which imposed spending caps that the administration estimates will generate about $1 trillion in deficit reduction over the next decade.
With a Republican-controlled House of Representatives, the document has little chance of becoming law. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said “no,” when asked yesterday on CBS’s “Face the Nation” if Obama’s budget had any change of passage in that chamber.
Efforts to replace the 10,581-strong U.N. force with a new Haitian army also persist. And anger over a deadly cholera epidemic, which originated near a U.N. camp and has sickened more than a half-million people and killed about 7,000 people, continues.
"The image of their forces has deteriorated," said Daly Valet, a political analyst and editor of Le Matin newspaper in Port-au-Prince.
At the same time, the delegation led by the United States will find a post-quake nation whose huge problems continue to exceed the limits of the U.N.'s mandate.
Political infighting and deepening polarization and debate have paralyzed the country in recent months, making for a potentially volatile situation.
"The recent two-year anniversary of the tragic earthquake makes this a good time for the council to go there and assess progress and encourage Haitian leaders and U.N. officials to take further positive steps," said Kurtis Cooper, a spokesman for the U.S. mission. "Clearly many challenges lay ahead, especially how to create economic opportunities for the Haitian people. And it is now time for President Michel Martelly and the Haitian government to convert their good ideas into actions."
Lawmakers in Greece voted early Monday to approve another round of austerity measures, sought in return for a new eurozone bailout of the debt-stricken country.
As lawmakers debated, police turned tear gas and stun grenades on protesters outside Greece's Parliament. Several buildings, including a bank, cafes and a movie theater, in Athens were set ablaze.
Twenty-five protesters and 40 officers were injured in the clashes, which occurred throughout the city, police said. Authorities detained at least 30 people.
The package, which includes deep cuts in government spending, wages and pensions, will help pave the way for eurozone finance ministers to sign off on the new €130 billion ($172.6 billion) bailout deal. It passed Parliament in a 199-74 vote.
Greece needs the funds in order to meet €14.5 billion in debt repayments due next month.
Respondents in the present case, however, seek to carry the meaning of "prohibiting the free exercise [of religion]" one large step further. They contend that their religious motivation for using peyote places them beyond the reach of a criminal law that is not specifically directed at their religious practice, and that is concededly constitutional as applied to those who use the drug for other reasons. They assert, in other words, that "prohibiting the free exercise [of religion]" includes requiring any individual to observe a generally applicable law that requires (or forbids) the performance of an act that his religious belief forbids (or requires). As a textual matter, we do not think the words must be given that meaning. It is no more necessary to regard the collection of a general tax, for example, as "prohibiting the free exercise [of religion]" by those citizens who believe support of organized government to be sinful than it is to regard the same tax as "abridging the freedom . . . of the press" of those publishing companies that must pay the tax as a condition of staying in business. It is a permissible reading of the text, in the one case as in the other, to say that, if prohibiting the exercise of religion (or burdening the activity of printing) is not the object of the tax, but merely the incidental effect of a generally applicable and otherwise valid provision, the First Amendment has not been offended.
Our decisions reveal that the latter reading is the correct one. We have never held that an individual's religious beliefs excuse him from compliance with an otherwise valid law prohibiting conduct that the State is free to regulate. On the contrary, the record of more than a century of our free exercise jurisprudence contradicts that proposition. As described succinctly by Justice Frankfurter in Minersville School Dist. Bd. of Educ. v. Gobitis, 310 U. S. 586, 310 U. S. 594-595 (1940):
"Conscientious scruples have not, in the course of the long struggle for religious toleration, relieved the individual from obedience to a general law not aimed at the promotion or restriction of religious beliefs. The mere possession of religious convictions which contradict the relevant concerns of a political society does not relieve the citizen from the discharge of political responsibilities."
Not satisfied with President Obama’s new religious accommodation, Republicans will move forward with legislation that permits any employer to deny contraception coverage in their health insurance plans, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said Sunday.
“If we end up having to try to overcome the President’s opposition by legislation, of course I’d be happy to support it, and intend to support it,” McConnell said. “We’ll be voting on that in the Senate and you can anticipate that that would happen as soon as possible.”For the record, I called the GOP using this Blount Amendment as part of the payroll tax hostage package on Saturday. Just sayin'.